Subj : Re: GNU Public Licences Revisited (again)
To   : comp.programming
From : Joe Butler
Date : Sun Sep 25 2005 01:48 pm


"Willem" <willem@stack.nl> wrote in message
news:slrndjd2t3.1446.willem@toad.stack.nl...
> Joe wrote:
> ) "Willem" <willem@stack.nl> wrote in message
> ) news:slrndjd1nf.12bn.willem@toad.stack.nl...
> )> Why would you 'still have the option of moving to another system' in
> )> closed source software, but not in open source software ?
> )
> ) Because one of the points that many people are making is that OSS can be
> ) fixed by the user - the implication being that if it does not work, it
can
> ) be fixed.  I don't think I've ever seen anyone saying, "A good reason to
use
> ) OSS is because you can dump it if it fails to work for you".  Rember, we
> ) were discussing being locked into a vendor's system.  You'll have the
same
> ) problems with OSS in your counter example.
>
> That does not imply that OSS is less 'dumpable' than closed source
> software.
>
> Suppose you have a problem with your software, and the software vendor is
> in some way unable to help you.
>
> With CSS, you have one option:
>    - Switch to a different software.

Or find a workaround.


>
> With OSS, you have more options:
>    - Switch to a different software.
>    - Have a different vendor support your software.
>
> So, with OSS, you have the same option as with CSS, and *additional*
> oprions that you do not have with CSS.  That makes it strictly better.

My original point in this discussion was that the costs of moving to a
different system may be comparable with fixing the OSS.  So, in the end,
what would be the more logical choice?  Sticking with an open system that
may have become dormant, or moving to a newer system (perhaps a closed
source system that has matured well).

>
> )> And what if you have closed source, and do not have that option ?
> )
> ) As I said, could you give an example of a closed source system where
this is
> ) likely to be the case?
>
> I'll leave that to others.  To me it's a 'what if'.
>
>
> SaSW, Willem
> -- 
> Disclaimer: I am in no way responsible for any of the statements
>             made in the above text. For all I know I might be
>             drugged or something..
>             No I'm not paranoid. You all think I'm paranoid, don't you !
> #EOT

.